June 6, 2010

California's white population has declined since 2000 at an unprecedented rate, hastening the day when Hispanics will be the state's largest population group, according to newly released state figures.

There were half a million fewer whites in California in 2008 than in 2000, a period when the state's overall population grew by 4 million to 38.1 million, according to a study released Thursday by the state Department of Finance.

By 2008, whites made up 40 percent of Californians, down from 47 percent at the turn of the century. In 2000, Hispanics comprised 32 percent of the population; that number grew to 37 percent in 2008.

Yet, San Francisco's racial mix remained consistent. Forty-four percent of the city was white in 2008, 30 percent was Asian and 14 percent was Hispanic, just as it was in 2000. Only the city's African American population showed a slight decline, from 7 percent to 6 percent.

This has become a common pattern: in elite cities like San Francisco, Manhattan, or Northwest D.C., the "trustatopias," the white share of the population is stable or growing, while the American-born black population is declining due to imprisonment, demolition of housing projects and replacement with Section 8 vouchers that go farther in dumpy towns, higher rents, and job competition from immigrants. What's not to like if you are a trust funder? For example, the white share of the D.C. population grew from 23% to 28% over seven years. Manhattan has enjoyed a white baby boom in recent years. Due to Hurricane Katrina, New Orleans, which had been down and out for decades, is returning to being a very nice place for rich white people to congregate. (Notice that Brad Pitt intends to settle there permanently if he can only get Angelina Jolie to calm down.)

"So," the top white people ask each other, "What are all those losers out in Nowheresville whining about? Obviously, they are just racists."

All that's really necessary to fix this nonsense is require people to live in the kind of environment they demand others live in as a matter of moral or legal principle. That means for limousine liberals, they must all move to Brazil and live in the slums under the protection of whatever the racists down there call their equivalent of "people of color".

This is the best way to head off a repeat of the French revolution's excesses. Let them eat...

Seattle belongs on that list. This place is a white/asian paradise. 20 miles from here the mexican immigrants are shooting 2 year olds in road rage incidences and raping women in the middle of a public parking lot.

Another factor is blacks don't aspire to live in blue coastal cities. Even if you are rich, you'll have at most a 2,000 sqft apartment for $1 or $2 million, but it doesn't look like you are living in a million dollar apartment since its so small. Blacks want be visibly "seen" as being rich and living in expensive crowded cramped places is not the way to go.

Generally speaking, wealthy blacks would rather live near the "Main Line" versus an area like West Hollywood. The true bluebloods of America live in the burbs, and this is what blacks seek to copy. I think the Veblen inspired term for this concept is pecuniary emulation. If you notice, rappers don't rap about chai tea, sea salt, and Ray Ban aviators, but instead choose the Hamptons, Bentley, and other fashions of the Queen Elizabeth crowd.

Can anyone give me more information about whether this is indeed true in Seattle?

I spend a fair bit of time in Seattle on business trips and many of the areas downtown seem to be overrun with dangerous types.

In particular, the international district seems to be pretty unsafe

Now, if you live in Manhattan South of 86th street you are almost 100% safe from violent crime.

And if you live in Los Angeles North of the 10 and West of the 405 your are almost 100% safe from violent crime

So the argument that if you are successful and buy in the best part of NYC or LA you can spend your entire year in a large safe neighborhood with all the amenities you would want.

Other cities just aren't like this - In philadelphia you can live in a beautiful two million dollar condo on Rittenhouse square, but just a few blocks away you have dangerous slums, so no matter how much money you make, if you live in Philadelphia your take on risks

My sense is that Seattle is sort of a cross between the Philly situation and the NYC or LA situation - being a successful person in Seattle you take on more risk than you would in NYC or LA

Steve, New Orleans has two spectacular neighborhoods. Both have a lot of life. The French Quarter and the Garden District.

Historically, the Garden district was settled by anglo saxons and then filled with other English speakers.

Historically the French quarter was filled with native Spanish and french speakers. But today, both districts are home to an international sophisticated creative and upscale crowd.

That being said, both districts are dramatically more dangerous than a really nice neighborhood in Manhattan or in San Francisco or in LA. Part of the decision to live in New Orleans is a decision to take more risk with your life.

Brad and Angelina are choosing a more dangerous path for themselves by living in New Orleans, but if I am wrong I am happy to hear it

Republicans have made a big deal of reaching out to average Americans for ideas about cutting spending, with programs like youcut and the Contract from America. Why doesn't the base make eliminating Section 8 housing front and center in these initiatives?

Gwinnett County is a suburban county NE of Atlanta. It was 90% white as late as 1990 and is now about 85% mestizo, with HUGE gang problems and rapidly declining schools. Basically, it's a whole county of strip malls and older SF homes, duplexes and aging apartments. These places were very nice when built in 1970-75, but not so much anymore.

Whites with families have moved to better homes on the northern fringe of the county, or even 1-2 more counties outwards. Meanwhile, intown Atlanta neighborhoods like Virginia Highlands, Inman Park and Grant Park are growing whiter and whiter with the influx of the SWPL types of young college grads.

On the other side of Atlanta is Clayton County, which was once 85% white but now 85% black. When the old-style projects were demolished in Atlanta, all of the section 8 and/or more feckless black families found cheap housing there. The county has now become a joke with skyrocketing crime rates, plummeting property values and with an new all-black school board which promptly lost its official accreditation recently through its ineptitude. (the first such loss of accreditation in the US since 1969!!)

DC is an interesting city, racially. In one quadrant there are very well off, very powerful people. They're nice and civilized (yes, they're often hypocrites on racial issues, but in day-to-day interactions they're enjoyable to be around). Every so often though there is the jolt to remind everyone what else is out there. I was in the Dupont Circle area (nice area), and this group of ghetto looking young black males is taking its time crossing a busy street with a do not walk sign. They get honked at, and of course they flick off the driver as they saunter their ghetto butts on by just as slow as they can.

Much as I hate having my peace disturbed and much as that stuff angers me, I'm glad the nice, powerful NW DC people occasionally have to experience that. Even better, they should have to experience waiting for the Metro at one of the stops the green line services, particularly about the time school lets out. Shrieking, fights, shoving, all by DC's finest.

Black females are willing to have two or three kids (often by two or three different men) while living in public housing (Sec 8 and HUD included).

Hispanic families are willing to share a house together (sometimes three families will share a house), therefore the men can afford to work at little above the minimum wage and still present us with two or three children for each family.

Blue state white females (and males) will not live in the projects. They'd rather work 3 jobs than live in the projects. They are having 1.5 children per female in their mid-30's.

Demographically whites get outbred in this manner even with no more immigration.

What I want to know is how Senators like Diane Feinstein and Barbara Boxer (and House members like Nancy Pelosi and Henry Waxman) expect to keep getting elected when the Hispanics become a majority out there? If they think they can change their names to Feinsteinez and Boxergado and Pelosierrero, I think they will be grievously mistaken. We will have many more hispanics in our Senate and house, less whites, and probably less blacks.

Jim Bowery, Exactly. Thats what Ive felt for so long. If one could just imagine (many will be horrified by this sentence of first-degree-aggravated thoughtcrime) private schools becoming illegal in the name of unequal outcomes (or whatever tortured reason Chief Justice Kagan can someday divine). All of them, even religous ones. Make (and bus them too dammit) wealthy children go to school with inner city kids in an "economic" normalizing of schools. Make it federal and mandate (and "implement", don't you just love that word?) cross-county busing. We dont care if you move 70 miles out of town, well will get your kid in the morning on pain of incarceration and make him sit right between Miguel the MS-13 wanna-be and Alphonso the Crip. Liberals would change their tune on the de-Europeanification of America faster than Jesus turned water into wine.

Yes the demographics are coming to a head but the scary thing is the racially hostile mood we are now experiencing under Obama.

National Review has a editorial each week on how Obama promised an end to corruption and yet we have more political corruption than ever. Obama promised bi-partisanship and then doesn't let Republicans into the room.

All of this is true but it pales into insignificance next to Obama's implicit promise to initiate racial harmony. Corruption and partisanship are survivable. Racial tensions seem to be at an all time high and race is an explosive issue.

I was at a nice neighborhood store waiting to be served at checkout. But a black guy in front of me who had no picture ID starts yelling about racism. The clerk was Chinese. He points at me and starts yelling about the "white man". I yelled back that I had my ID.

A couple years ago I would have just waited but tempers are getting short. There's an ugly mood brewing. When it affects even sweet, mild mannered people like me you know trouble is coming.

How about some mood data? There must be some survey numbers on racial tolerance.

Steve: Section 8 doesn't work the way you think it does. The value of your voucher is pegged to the average cost of renting in each city. So, if you are a single mother with two daughters, you qualify for a two-bedroom rental unit. When your name comes up on the waiting list, you try to find a two-bedroom apartment or house whose owner will accept you that does not rent for more than the maximum that HUD will pay. You are NOT allowed to "top up" the payment.

There is NO incentive to get a crappy apartment in a bad neighborhood. If you can find a landlord willing to take you in a new or recent development, you'll get good schools for your children, low crime rates AND a unit that comes with a washer and dryer, larger square footage, two or two and a half bathrooms, etc.

Lots of places will NOT accept HUD vouchers, and lots of individuals with HUD vouchers have such a disastrous rental history that no one will take them, but down-on-their-luck people willing to move to a place where the HUD waiting list is very short should look into the program. With HUD, foodstamps, and a part-time job, the local medical clinic, etc., it is not impossible to go back to school, or get by with a part-time job.

White people often think that government housing help = "the projects" but the truth is that the government has LOTS of different programs, including at least two different programs in my area in which you get a brand-new house with up to five bedrooms and two bathrooms and a sweetheart 33 year mortgage.

I have seen people on the news out in California who have lost their jobs and are now living in their cars because they can't find affordable housing that will accept their dogs. They, and their dogs, could be living a much better life in the middle of the country, all subsidized by Uncle Sugar. The waiting list for a voucher is probably five years or more at this point in California, but as of a few years ago, it was only one month in my area.

There has been a great deal of black migration from LA and New Orleans, with extremely brazen crimes now perpetrated throughout town. The nicer neighborhoods hire private security patrols and a lot of Old Atlanta types have sold their estates and left. No idea where to.

The hip-hop 'industry' has attracted a number of very, uh, vibrant types, complete with shootings on the sets of music videos in ex-urban Henry County.

Meso-Americans: everywhere. Most seem fine but I wonder about the tags that have become ubiquitous. I'm sure it's nothing to worry about.

Two other groups with a big presence here are Arabs (Christian and Muslim) and Hindus. Should be interesting. It was also interesting to see all the armed guards with no less than two sidearms outside the synagogues after 9/11. When we intervene in inter-tribal disputes overseas and invite the protagonists from all sides here, surely nothing could possibly go wrong.

Steve - you have got to be flabbergasted by your L.A. When I was a tyke I watched 'The Rockford Files' religiously. Jewish and Italian bad guys? How very, very quaint.

@NWDCAs a DC metro rider on the green line around 4pm, I heartily concur. When our nation's finest students get out school, it's best to just turn the volume up on the ole iPod (speaking of which, Mr. Sailer, please let me know how I can facilitate the production of the weekly Steve Sailer podcast). One of the reasons citizens of GTown didn't want a metro station in their 'hood (which they successfully blocked) was for that exact reason.

Manhattan is incredibly safe these days below 96th street (and in some places, for another 5 or 10 streets uptown of there). Liberals don't like to talk about why it's so safe. It's safe because the NYPD is tougher on ghetto blacks than the U.S. military is on Muslim terrorists. The NYPD doesn't water board suspects, it beats confessions out of the obviously guilty ones. It will also stop and frisk any suspicious looking black man or teen in Manhattan on the slightest of pretexts, and arrest him if it finds a weapon on him.

It's hard to believe New York liberals aren't aware of this. Anyone who knows an NYC cop well enough to have a candid conversation knows about this. It's the dirty little pillar of their Whitopia.

while the American-born black population is declining due to imprisonment, demolition of housing projects and replacement with Section 8 vouchers that go farther in dumpy towns, higher rents, and job competition from immigrants.

Dubious, and you leave out an essential factor. The black populations has been moving south and sunbelt wise for years, just like the rest of the white population, and California has been losing people consistently over time, including blacks.

Indeed, Section 8 benefits are relatively generous and open-ended, a criticism made by both liberal and conservative policy wonks, so it is difficult to see what "Section 8" has to do with the decline. More relevant to the decline in places like San Francisco, are the numerous "environmental" zoning restrictions put in place that artificially depress the supply of housing, as well as other liberal prescriptions such as rent control (Sowell 2004).

Another reason for more whites staying put in the cities in question are (a) economic downturns sparking a desire for lesser communtes and (b) slower declines in local economies. The tech industry around SF for example experienced relatively fewer job losses than in other cities.http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29762700/

Hence trustafarian patterns may simply be the result of undramatic economic forces, and San Francisco has long been a very expensive place to live. That is nothing new.

As recently as 1970 California was 80% White. The state was once known for its huge hordes of White teenagers. Sad....

Some would see this as a plus, as it allows for the growing representation of higher IQ Asians, who too, like higher IQ white liberals, have tended to vote Democrat in recent years.http://www.asiansvote.com/entries/000162.shtml

Anon sez:Why doesn't the base make eliminating Section 8 housing front and center in these initiatives?

Because Section 8 benefits a lot of white people- from white landlords, to white real estate agents, to white bureaucrats administering said program. And a lot of white people use Section 8. The families receiving Section 8 assistance are 40 percent white, 41 percent black, 16 percent Hispanic, 2 percent Asian, and 1 percent Native American, according to HUD figures. The above being said, Sec 8 has a lot of problems including its open-endedness and sometimes overly generous payments - higher than what the local housing market might bear -another reason white landlords like it guaranteed payments..

"What I want to know is how Senators like Diane Feinstein and Barbara Boxer .... expect to keep getting elected when the Hispanics become a majority out there?"

In the long run they really don't care, they're obsessed with a hatred of white people and don't care what comes after or what it does to them. They're cultural suicide bombers, they just want to destroy. The race issue started out as a cynical political ploy by the extreme left but now, after decades of the most vituperative hate propaganda in history, it has become the raison d'etre of the left. That's why the left has no problem supporting the mass-immigration of, say, Muslims, who are against everything the left purports to stand for, into the West. They're psychotic racists, and while they'd love to hang on to their perks and positions they're not going to let that get in the way of the main program.

The increased whiteness of a FEW cities is certainly due in part to the elite consciously dumping their black miscreants on the suburbs. They did so in the name of breaking up the bad influence of public housing high rises, but in truth it's just a desperate (and doomed to fail) attempt to keep their beloved cities livable. Like their self-chosen neo-segregated living and play patterns it shows you what they really think about equality.

The suburbanization of the poor is another one of those slow-moving disasters that's easy to ignore if it's not happening to you.

One Section 8 house can spoil the pleasantness and tranquility of a suburban street. Junky cars (if running), maybe parked on the grass. Grass mowed indifferently if at all. "Boyfriends." Garbage cans left at the curb. And that's just the adults! Many people are not equipped to live in a detached house and yet that's what our policies push them toward.

I would submit that in a true urban setting that most of this can be better absorbed. Certainly in an apartment building you wouldn't immediately be able to pick out the "poor" household the way you can on a suburban street.

The suburbs have disadvantages for the low income person, too. Needing to keep a car, even a beater, is a big expense. Stuff like laundry if you don't have your own washer-dryer is a bigger hassle to do. One thing that struck me about the gas-price-shocks of 2008 were all of the stories about suddenly strained budgets with gas taking up any extra money and then some. (By contrast, while I didn't like it, $4.50/gallon gas didn't make me sacrifice anything even mildly important). These same kind of folks, by and large, wouldn't have even had a car in my grandparents generation, and would have been insulated from those price shocks.

Live in an urban whiteopia, by all means if you can afford it. You can be blissfully unaware of just how crappy the suburbs are getting.

A large portion of Section 8 vouchers go to the elderly and disabled. Assisting them makes sense to me, but why do a select group of single mothers get assistance as well? They cost the program more because they rent more expensive (bigger) apartments, and often have no reported income to contribute for rent. Elderly and disabled people remain on wait lists for years while the irresponsible get free housing for the rest of their lives.

"Lots of places will NOT accept HUD vouchers, and lots of individuals with HUD vouchers have such a disastrous rental history that no one will take them, "

This is true. The vouchers aren't like cash for the renters. The property owner has to get the property approved for Section 8, and deal with regular inspections (which they have to get the tenants to cooperate with) from the program. It's a burdensome process.

It's common for non-Section 8 tenants looking to move into multifamily housing to point blank ask if the complex accepts Section 8 and rule out places that do. It's more problematic in condos or houses, because you can't control whether your neighbors rent their property and how. The only way to effectively screen Section 8 out of a neighborhood is high property values (relative to the Section 8 jurisdiction).

What are you trying to say when you say "trust funder"? I knew real trust-fund kids in college - as a rule they didn't end up in Eastern seaboard cities - they ski bum in Colorado or Vermont, sail in the Caribbean, or raise grapes in Napa. The whites in Boston, NYC, DC, Chicago, Philly etc. are generally very ambitious striver types - using the word "trust funders" makes it seem like you have some class envy issues.

I once was talking with a Realtor who was selling my mom's house. I made a comment that I might want to buy a rental someday in a certain run down part of town near where we lived. When I asked him why he was not so keen on that idea he said, "The poor people have to live somewhere". When you have a critical mass of pathological losers all sorts of weird and bad things happen. The same is true of the rich parts of town. Having to rub elbows with such people is not what they have spent their careers working for.

"I heartily concur. When our nation's finest students get out school, it's best to just turn the volume up on the ole iPod"

Ha! That's been my strategy, but after one particularly physical tussle amongst the fine, upstanding urban "yoofs" I got concerned I'd be knocked into the path of an oncoming train if I wasn't paying close enough attention to what they were doing.

Chicago is up there too on the elite white city list. Chicago offers vouchers to former public housing residents that they use to move to downstate cities like Galesburg. Chicago has gentrified tremendously in the last 30 years and for a while the inner city had more housing starts than booming suburban places like Naperville-Aurora. Chicago has been cleaned up and Galesburg now looks like the south side of Chicago!

"Hit the nail on the head again, Steve. I grew up in DC (city) and never realized the magnitude of immigration until I moved to the suburbs."

The suburbs of Chicago were white in the 70's and 80's and now they are full of immigrants who don't want to live with blacks in the city. There are a few more blacks in my area, but a ton of Indians, Mexicans, Eastern Euros. I feel like I am in a foreign country some times when I go to the store or library.

"Live in an urban whiteopia, by all means if you can afford it. You can be blissfully unaware of just how crappy the suburbs are getting."

good point, The suburbs feel totally different than 30 years ago. Foreigners and minorities all over the place. The few times I went into Walmart,I felt like I didn't belong, like I was the outsider. It's the same when I go to the library. I never saw a black person when I was a kid, now I see many more,plus all sorts of minorities. There are schools that are 80% Mexican that used to be 99% white in the 70's.

"Chicago is up there too on the elite white city list. Chicago offers vouchers to former public housing residents that they use to move to downstate cities like Galesburg. Chicago has gentrified tremendously in the last 30 years and for a while the inner city had more housing starts than booming suburban places like Naperville-Aurora. Chicago has been cleaned up and Galesburg now looks like the south side of Chicago!"

Here's the Google Wallet FAQ. From it: "You will need to have (or sign up for) Google Wallet to send or receive money. If you have ever purchased anything on Google Play, then you most likely already have a Google Wallet. If you do not yet have a Google Wallet, don’t worry, the process is simple: go to wallet.google.com and follow the steps." You probably already have a Google ID and password, which Google Wallet uses, so signing up Wallet is pretty painless.

You can put money into your Google Wallet Balance from your bank account and send it with no service fee.

Google Wallet works from both a website and a smartphone app (Android and iPhone -- the Google Wallet app is currently available only in the U.S., but the Google Wallet website can be used in 160 countries).

Or, once you sign up with Google Wallet, you can simply send money via credit card, bank transfer, or Wallet Balance as an attachment from Google's free Gmail email service. Here'show to do it.

(Non-tax deductible.)

Fourth: if you have a Wells Fargo bank account, you can transfer money to me (with no fees) via Wells Fargo SurePay. Just tell WF SurePay to send the money to my ancient AOL email address steveslrATaol.com -- replace the AT with the usual @). (Non-tax deductible.)

Fifth: if you have a Chase bank account (or, theoretically,other bank accounts), you can transfer money to me (with no fees) via Chase QuickPay (FAQ). Just tell Chase QuickPay to send the money to my ancient AOL email address (steveslrATaol.com -- replace the AT with the usual @). If Chase asks for the name on my account, it's Steven Sailer with an n at the end of Steven. (Non-tax deductible.)

My Book:

"Steve Sailer gives us the real Barack Obama, who turns out to be very, very different - and much more interesting - than the bland healer/uniter image stitched together out of whole cloth this past six years by Obama's packager, David Axelrod. Making heavy use of Obama's own writings, which he admires for their literary artistry, Sailer gives the deepest insights I have yet seen into Obama's lifelong obsession with 'race and inheritance,' and rounds off his brilliant character portrait with speculations on how Obama's personality might play out in the Presidency." - John Derbyshire Author, "Prime Obsession: Bernhard Riemann and the Greatest Unsolved Problem in Mathematics" Click on the image above to buy my book, a reader's guide to the new President's autobiography.